On 23 January 2012 00:44, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 22 January 2012 23:39, Svip <svi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> The name 'talk page' is also a terrible name and very ambiguous as to >> what it is. A far more appropriate candidate for such a page's name >> would be 'collaboration page', 'work page', 'improvement page' and so >> on. > > > English Wikinews calls it "collaboration". On English Wikipedia it > used to be called "talk", this was changed to "discussion", and it was > recently changed back to "talk".
I know this. But neither of "talk" or "discussion" refers to the actual purpose of the page. It rather refers how the page is functioning. Like calling it "Cellular phone" rather than "Mobile phone", because naming it after the technology it uses is far more descriptive than its benefits for users? Classic English. It's a dust sucker, not a vacuum cleaner. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
